瓶子和砖头

J. Kling, M. Mitchell
{"title":"瓶子和砖头","authors":"J. Kling, M. Mitchell","doi":"10.5840/RADPHILREV20197997","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We argue that violent political protest is justified in a generally just society when violence is required to send a message about the nature of the injustice at issue, and when it is not ruled out by moral or pragmatic considerations. Focusing on protest as a mode of public address, we argue that its communicative function can sometimes justify or require the use of violence. The injustice at the heart of the Baltimore protests—police brutality against black Americans—is a paradigmatic case of this sort, because of the rela­tionship of the police to the injustice and the protests against it.","PeriodicalId":402397,"journal":{"name":"Radical Philosophy Review","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bottles and Bricks\",\"authors\":\"J. Kling, M. Mitchell\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/RADPHILREV20197997\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We argue that violent political protest is justified in a generally just society when violence is required to send a message about the nature of the injustice at issue, and when it is not ruled out by moral or pragmatic considerations. Focusing on protest as a mode of public address, we argue that its communicative function can sometimes justify or require the use of violence. The injustice at the heart of the Baltimore protests—police brutality against black Americans—is a paradigmatic case of this sort, because of the rela­tionship of the police to the injustice and the protests against it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":402397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radical Philosophy Review\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radical Philosophy Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/RADPHILREV20197997\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radical Philosophy Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/RADPHILREV20197997","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们认为,在一个普遍公正的社会中,当暴力被要求传达关于所讨论的不公正的性质的信息时,当它不被道德或务实的考虑所排除时,暴力政治抗议是合理的。关注作为一种公共演讲方式的抗议,我们认为其交际功能有时可以证明或要求使用暴力。巴尔的摩抗议活动的核心问题——警察对美国黑人的暴行——是这类事件的典型案例,因为警察与不公正以及抗议活动之间的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bottles and Bricks
We argue that violent political protest is justified in a generally just society when violence is required to send a message about the nature of the injustice at issue, and when it is not ruled out by moral or pragmatic considerations. Focusing on protest as a mode of public address, we argue that its communicative function can sometimes justify or require the use of violence. The injustice at the heart of the Baltimore protests—police brutality against black Americans—is a paradigmatic case of this sort, because of the rela­tionship of the police to the injustice and the protests against it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信